[monodeldiablo]

> So you get horrendous spellings if using Latin characters for the Slavic sounds, like you see in Polish.

I'm not sure where you get this from.

Several Slavic languages (Czech, Slovenian, Croatian, etc) use Latin-derived alphabets and managed to preserve their pronunciation with 100% fidelity. The Polish orthography is not the only solution to this, and I think it's a stretch to regard Croatian spellings as "horrendous". I am, of course, biased. But the number of characters in a word in Croatian maps 1:1 with its Cyrillic spelling, for example.

[jjtheblunt]

Oh, I know, and agree, and i should have said horrendous to explain to others not familiar with it.

I mean they use multiple letters for a sound (or diacritics which is neater in my opinion) is all I'm saying, like modern english does for voiced and unvoiced "th" whereas older germanic had eth and thorn glyphs, and iceland still uses them.

[jjtheblunt]

how do you denote soft-sign and hard-sign (merkiznak i tvortiznak ?) in Croatian ?